[Abandoned] - Russian Revolution

Abandoned and Vacationed maps. The final resting place, unless you recycle.

Moderators: Cartographers, Global Moderators

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Kabanellas on Thu Jul 08, 2010 11:12 am

Congrats on the map Helix!! I see some very interesting gameplay ‘nuances’ that will definitely make this a fun map to be played.

I have some doubts though:

-where are exactly the starting positions? Only the commanders?

-I’m thinking that (maybe) not all Commanders have equal advantages.... Kolchak for instances: his headquarters will give access to 1 city and will have immediate access to the Check legion. But comparing to Kolchak, Stalin will start winning having his HQ on a city...

-You’ll only get Ukraine’s or Poland’s bonus owning Volhynia right? Not sure if that is obvious enough... guess so.

- Owning Poland, for instances, will render all those regions in Ukraine useless. Shouldn’t they also yield territory bonus like the high or low populated areas?
User avatar
Colonel Kabanellas
Cartography Assistant
Cartography Assistant
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:21 pm
Location: "Don’t ever wrestle with a pig. You’ll both get dirty, but the pig will enjoy it."
Medals: 66
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (7)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (15) Map Contribution (7) General Contribution (1)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby iancanton on Sat Jul 10, 2010 2:24 am

Kabanellas wrote:where are exactly the starting positions? Only the commanders?

yes, since they have auto-deploy bonuses. most other regions have random deployment.

Kabanellas wrote:I’m thinking that (maybe) not all Commanders have equal advantages.... Kolchak for instances: his headquarters will give access to 1 city and will have immediate access to the Check legion. But comparing to Kolchak, Stalin will start winning having his HQ on a city...

that's a good point. we'll have to consider this when fine-tuning the bonuses and neutrals.

Kabanellas wrote:Owning Poland, for instances, will render all those regions in Ukraine useless. Shouldn’t they also yield territory bonus like the high or low populated areas?

if u hold only part of poland or ukraine, then u'll receive the default +1 for every 3 regions that is standard for most maps (there isn't really a separate low-population area with a special bonus). perhaps the poland and ukraine bonuses (in the legend, calling them national bonuses instead of regional bonuses will help to illustrate one of the reasons behind the fighting) are best done in the manner of unification germany, so that poland and ukraine both exclude volhynia, but an additional +1 is given if either national bonus is held with volhynia.

ian. :)
Image
User avatar
Brigadier iancanton
Cartography Assistant
Cartography Assistant
 
Posts: 1710
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:40 am
Location: europe
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) General Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (7) General Contribution (13)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Kabanellas on Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:44 am

iancanton wrote:if u hold only part of poland or ukraine, then u'll receive the default +1 for every 3 regions that is standard for most maps


ok, I just got confused because in the legend you can read: '+1 for three territories of high populated areas' with a dark brown square...

What I'm thinking now is (putting the high populated areas aside, I think that's well understood):

if I hold any 3 territories in the brown area I'll get a +1 troop (beside the usual territory number bonus). I won't be getting this extra 1 troop (for 3 terr) in the Baltics, Poland or Ukrayne. Is this right?
User avatar
Colonel Kabanellas
Cartography Assistant
Cartography Assistant
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 12:21 pm
Location: "Don’t ever wrestle with a pig. You’ll both get dirty, but the pig will enjoy it."
Medals: 66
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (2)
Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (2)
Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (7)
General Achievement (2) Clan Achievement (15) Map Contribution (7) General Contribution (1)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Sat Jul 10, 2010 7:04 am

Thanks Kab and Ian.

Hmm... the legend should read "+1 for every territory outside of high population area"

I think you would be reading into this correctly as the map, outside of the high pop zone, just yields the normal bonus.

The tricky thing about Ukraine/Poland is that I want a player to not be able to get both bonuses. The bonuses need to counter each other. If there was a strong Ukraine, then Poland might not have attacked during the war because her territorial ambitions at the expense of the Ukraine couldn't have been fulfilled. So hence, if a player holds Ukraine then the Poland bonus is null and void (see Volyhnia). Likewise, if Poland is strong and has the bonus, then Ukraine becomes a weak power.

Other changes include Stalin starting on Saratov, as opposed to Tsaritsyn.

The Volchak starting near the Czech legion is a good point and one I hadn't considered... especially as Yudenich and Kaledin start near the British areas as well. Perhaps the immediate starting game advantage could be nullified if there were a different bonus system there... Secure both British flags for foreign support for +4, +6 if including Czech legion. I figure make it really high to always be tempting, but a player would have to be in the right situation to take advantage of it and always in the later part of the game rather than the early.

Here's the new version:

Click image to enlarge.
image
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Sat Jul 10, 2010 2:03 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:...Perhaps the immediate starting game advantage could be nullified if there were a different bonus system there... Secure both British flags for foreign support for +4, +6 if including Czech legion. I figure make it really high to always be tempting, but a player would have to be in the right situation to take advantage of it and always in the later part of the game rather than the early...


I like this a lot. Perhaps, though, lower the neutral values to 3's then, since they're all so spread out?

Just to make sure that there's room on the map, maybe you should include a title sometime in the near future...

One last thing, and that's the "low-population" areas. I really like the uniqueness and historical aspect of the idea, but in terms of gameplay I'm not convinced that it won't be imbalancing. It's conceivable in 8 player games, for instance, that an unlucky bugger could start with 3, 4 or even 5 fewer troops than most of the other players. On team games, the troop differential could become even more pronounced.

The troop differential is okay if there were a balancing advantage to having the low-population areas, but there isn't. In fact, the opposite is true: the high pop areas have the juicy bonuses, a wealth of cities and rapid movement through rail junctions. You said in your original reasoning that the low-pop areas gave players a chance to build up men to take the high-pop, but I can't see how in an actual game that a player could win such a build-up unless one is assuming that the high-pop players attack each other and ignore the low-pop. This last reason isn't a good one, to my mind, because it assumes that players' strategy/behavior will cover up an imbalance in the map dynamic.
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby iancanton on Fri Jul 16, 2010 4:36 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:Secure both British flags for foreign support for +4, +6 if including Czech legion.

MarshalNey wrote:I like this a lot. Perhaps, though, lower the neutral values to 3's then, since they're all so spread out?

agreed. perhaps even 2 neutrals for czech legion, since it's worthless unless u have both british flags.

MarshalNey wrote:One last thing, and that's the "low-population" areas. I really like the uniqueness and historical aspect of the idea, but in terms of gameplay I'm not convinced that it won't be imbalancing. It's conceivable in 8 player games, for instance, that an unlucky bugger could start with 3, 4 or even 5 fewer troops than most of the other players. On team games, the troop differential could become even more pronounced.

territories in high population areas draft more armies with commander and hq. a differential in initial deployment doesn't apply at the start because each hq is neutral: someone must conquer the neutral hq before the bonus is activated. in the legend, replacing the full stop after hq by a comma will make this clearer.

ian. :)
Image
User avatar
Brigadier iancanton
Cartography Assistant
Cartography Assistant
 
Posts: 1710
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:40 am
Location: europe
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (1)
Freestyle Achievement (2) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) General Achievement (4) Clan Achievement (7) General Contribution (13)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:28 am

iancanton wrote:territories in high population areas draft more armies with commander and hq. a differential in initial deployment doesn't apply at the start because each hq is neutral: someone must conquer the neutral hq before the bonus is activated. in the legend, replacing the full stop after hq by a comma will make this clearer.


Agreed on the comma (a colon might be even better), but what I'm referring to isn't the bonus collection, but the starting values of troops. Outside of the 'high-pop'/national areas, the troops starting values are 2s instead of 3s. This one sort of snuck by me for awhile, then I looked back some number of pages and found a single reference to it. It's actually a bit of a radical idea, if I'm reading the map correctly.
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby theBastard on Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:05 pm

how exactly the same/different will be starting positions from last version of map? because I see that some players will have more starting positions in high population area as others.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class theBastard
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Medals: 5
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:27 pm

Alright, i hear you guys on the comma. Well, addressing your concerns Marshal, every player can attack into the high pop zone within one territory save for Kaledin. Deniken and Trotsky are the only ones which do not attack have a buffer territory between them and the high pop zone. I'm not sure what to do about this, but I'll try to figure something out to balance the drop. To be fair though, every player is randomly deploying throughout the map, its just the commanders that are slightly uneven.

Bastard - Basically, the only starting positions are the 8 commanders. The rest of the map, except the flagged territories, are random deployment, which should be pretty fair.
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:17 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:Alright, i hear you guys on the comma. Well, addressing your concerns Marshal, every player can attack into the high pop zone within one territory save for Kaledin. Deniken and Trotsky are the only ones which do not attack have a buffer territory between them and the high pop zone. I'm not sure what to do about this, but I'll try to figure something out to balance the drop. To be fair though, every player is randomly deploying throughout the map, its just the commanders that are slightly uneven...


Hmmm I'm not convinced. In fact, I'm far less concerned about the commanders than the 2-spot vs. 3-spot regions. Before I launch into a discourse on the topic, however, I want to make absolutely sure that I'm not misunderstanding the map.

A player that dropped Kostroma, for instance, would start with 2 troops on that region, yes? And a player that dropped Yaroslav would start with 3 troops? And all of the regions except commanders- 'high-pop' and 'low-pop'- are random, open deployment (nearly certain this is yes, but just want to be absolutely explicit)?
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby theBastard on Sun Jul 18, 2010 1:03 am

Industrial Helix wrote:Bastard - Basically, the only starting positions are the 8 commanders. The rest of the map, except the flagged territories, are random deployment, which should be pretty fair.


hm, sorry me that I do not understand, but each player will start with commander and the rest of map will be neutral or also divided between players?

if yes (all map divided between players), I´ve only noticed that now it looks that some players have more territories in high population area - so they gain more units from start.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class theBastard
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Medals: 5
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Sun Jul 18, 2010 6:19 am

The territories will be divided randomly by the game engine thingy according to how many players there are. This will be totally even, though some potential exists for imbalances.

If you're looking at the map with the numbers that I've posted, it is not reflective of which player will get territories where, I just colored some numbers and through them up there to illustrate that it will have random deployment over starting positions or all neutrals. So if it seems biased toward blue or pink or whatever, it's just a mock up.
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Mon Jul 19, 2010 12:00 am

Industrial Helix wrote:The territories will be divided randomly by the game engine thingy according to how many players there are. This will be totally even, though some potential exists for imbalances.

If you're looking at the map with the numbers that I've posted, it is not reflective of which player will get territories where, I just colored some numbers and through them up there to illustrate that it will have random deployment over starting positions or all neutrals. So if it seems biased toward blue or pink or whatever, it's just a mock up.


I'm not sure if this was meant to answer my question or TB's, so I guess I'll respond...

It's not the player colors that worry me, I understand that's just for show and not meant as some set of coded starting positions- which as I understand it, wouldn't work anyway.

I'm counting, I think, 12 regions for open (random) deployment that start at 2 troops, and 29 regions that start at 3 troops. Is this correct?
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:39 pm

MarshalNey wrote:
Industrial Helix wrote:Alright, i hear you guys on the comma. Well, addressing your concerns Marshal, every player can attack into the high pop zone within one territory save for Kaledin. Deniken and Trotsky are the only ones which do not attack have a buffer territory between them and the high pop zone. I'm not sure what to do about this, but I'll try to figure something out to balance the drop. To be fair though, every player is randomly deploying throughout the map, its just the commanders that are slightly uneven...


Hmmm I'm not convinced. In fact, I'm far less concerned about the commanders than the 2-spot vs. 3-spot regions. Before I launch into a discourse on the topic, however, I want to make absolutely sure that I'm not misunderstanding the map.

A player that dropped Kostroma, for instance, would start with 2 troops on that region, yes? And a player that dropped Yaroslav would start with 3 troops? And all of the regions except commanders- 'high-pop' and 'low-pop'- are random, open deployment (nearly certain this is yes, but just want to be absolutely explicit)?


Sorry Marshal, I should have directly addressed your question.... in short. Yes. In long, the commanders have starting positons and the rest of the map, except for the designated neutrals, drops random.
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:54 pm

MarshalNey wrote:... I really like the uniqueness and historical aspect of the idea, but in terms of gameplay I'm not convinced that it won't be imbalancing. It's conceivable in 8 player games, for instance, that an unlucky bugger could start with 3, 4 or even 5 fewer troops than most of the other players. On team games, the troop differential could become even more pronounced.

The troop differential is okay if there were a balancing advantage to having the low-population areas, but there isn't. In fact, the opposite is true: the high pop areas have the juicy bonuses, a wealth of cities and rapid movement through rail junctions. You said in your original reasoning that the low-pop areas gave players a chance to build up men to take the high-pop, but I can't see how in an actual game that a player could win such a build-up unless one is assuming that the high-pop players attack each other and ignore the low-pop. This last reason isn't a good one, to my mind, because it assumes that players' strategy/behavior will cover up an imbalance in the map dynamic.


Industrial Helix wrote:... addressing your concerns Marshal, every player can attack into the high pop zone within one territory save for Kaledin. Deniken and Trotsky are the only ones which do not attack have a buffer territory between them and the high pop zone. I'm not sure what to do about this, but I'll try to figure something out to balance the drop. To be fair though, every player is randomly deploying throughout the map, its just the commanders that are slightly uneven.


OK, let me start off by again saying (a) I love this map, (b) I love unique ideas, and (c) making the starting troops uneven is pretty unique.

The potential problem I see is the raw difference in starting troops- not so much attack routes where your thoughts are gathered- but the fact that in some game setups, players are guaranteed to have different starting numbers of troops. And being random deployment, there is a decent chance that the difference between the highest and lowest could be substantial... say, a 3 or 4 troop swing? Players who pick the "Automatic" setting for a map are expecting everyone to start with even numbers of troops on even numbers of regions.

With 12 regions deploying 2 troops (randomly assigned) and 29 regions deploying 3 troops (again random), the worst case is easy to see- a 2 or 3 player game where somehow one player ends up with all twelve 2-troop regions. That would mean one player would start with 12 more troops than his opponent, before the game even really begins. I don't use this example as a serious argument against the 2-troop/3-troop scheme... after all you'd probably win the lottery before that would happen. I'm just pointing it out as an illustration of where my fears lie.

No, I think what is far more likely is for a player to end up with a preponderance of those twelve 2-troop regions, and then end up with fewer troops than everyone else. In fact, it is far less likely for there to be an even distribution of these regions between all players than there is to be an inequity of some kind, great or small.

Which is fine, I think, as long as there is some kind of compensating advantage.

And that is the key to making this idea work, I think. Unfortunately, the 2-troop areas are exactly the opposite of advantage- they give no bonus and are not necessarily close to cities like the 3-troop areas.

I'm not sure what sort of 'compensating advantage' would satisfy your sensibilities about the historical nature of the country and the conflict- I'm still slowly reading up on the subject myself- but I strongly feel at the moment that one should exist.
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:49 am

Ah ahh... I see. Hmm, this is a problem and few ideas spring to mind...

1) Wish the XML would allow me to have two sets of starting positions independent of each other... Not likely to happen but one can wish.
2) Toy with the Czech and British bonus to act as a counter weight. Yes a player may start with less troops, but he's right next to something that pays out bigger.
3) Reduce the number of low pop territories to reduce the effects of the uneven distribution. (Probably the best and only solution that addresses the starting game initial deployment).
4) Add a regional bonus to the low pop area to balance...
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Tue Jul 20, 2010 11:54 pm

Good ideas... hmmmm

(1) Amen, I think multiple sets of starting positions would be the answer to many a mapmaker's prayers.
(2) This occured to me, but I wasn't sure how much you'd like it given that, as you say, foreign support did not actually factor in much. However, it seems clear that foreign support had the potential to be a major participant, if the rural generals had shown more saavy. And since any historical CC map is as much 'what if?" as it is history... well, I think it deserves a look.
(3) I hate to see it go this route, as it really makes the 2-troop regions more of a thrown-in oddity rather than a bold gameplay feature, but it has as you say the benefit of fixing the problem directly and simply.
(4) This could work, if there is a bonus area (or two) that would make sense... I'd have to defer to your knowledge on the topic.

Of course, a combination of (2) and (4) might also do the trick ;) I'm hestiant to make any direct suggestions until I get a sense of what, historically, would make the most sense to you.
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Wed Jul 21, 2010 8:08 pm

Well... I guess its not so much the bonus arrangement that makes it unfair, but more the troop disparity, as you've pointed out.

I'm still thinking about it.

Though I want to say that although the game starts uneven, it doesn't start unfair. Which would bring in the bonuses, which brings me in a circle.

If I brought back the old flag bonus system, my worst case scenario is that a player drops majority of the high pop zone and still managed to get nearby access to the flags, thus dropping the game.

Here's a radical option... make it a conquest map? Turn all those 2s and 3s into neutrals? I dunno how I feel about it though.

In my mind, using random deployment on most of the map essentially amounted to having smarter neutrals. Given the number of men on a commander, that would inevitably be the main thrust of the player's moves, even in 2 player games as he's got 4 commanders. So in the end, the 3s and 2s were inconsequential. They could be dangerous as a player had control over them. But in the end, the main threat was the commanders... does this make sense to you?
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Thu Jul 22, 2010 10:20 pm

I've been trying to think how exactly to clarify my thoughts all day long, but I guess I'll just have to put something out there and hope it comes across.

Industrial Helix wrote:Well... I guess its not so much the bonus arrangement that makes it unfair, but more the troop disparity, as you've pointed out.

I'm still thinking about it.

Though I want to say that although the game starts uneven, it doesn't start unfair. Which would bring in the bonuses, which brings me in a circle...

...In my mind, using random deployment on most of the map essentially amounted to having smarter neutrals. Given the number of men on a commander, that would inevitably be the main thrust of the player's moves, even in 2 player games as he's got 4 commanders. So in the end, the 3s and 2s were inconsequential. They could be dangerous as a player had control over them. But in the end, the main threat was the commanders... does this make sense to you?


Of course, I'm not sure that I'm understanding 100% your thoughts here, but I think the gist is this:
(1) The bonus arrangement for the drop is fair
(2) The troop disparity is unfair... but maybe not important? (undecided, see #4 and #5)
(3) Messing with the bonuses could be a case of fixing something that isn't broken
(4) The non-commander regions are more barriers than avenues of attack for players; players' tactics will (should?) center around the Commanders
(5) Given (4), the distribution of the non-commander regions is largely irrelevant to gameplay balance

Actually, before I give my thoughts, maybe it would be best if you could check me on the above. It's actually a lot of stuff and it'd be foolish for me to put words into your mouth and then debate them.
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby theBastard on Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:00 am

Industrial Helix wrote:Well... I guess its not so much the bonus arrangement that makes it unfair, but more the troop disparity, as you've pointed out.

I'm still thinking about it.

Though I want to say that although the game starts uneven, it doesn't start unfair. Which would bring in the bonuses, which brings me in a circle.


I think there is possibility how to set up startting positons for fair. there are 2 commanders in "high population" zone, 1 in Latvia, 1 in Ukraine and 4 in "low population" zone.

player from Latvia could try to gain Baltic states bonus and is close to Polish bonus or has near several "high population" territories, player from Herson could gain Ukraine bonus (which will be harder as Baltics), player from Oren is close to Czechoslovak Legion´s bonus, player from Kuban could gain Navy bonus and player from Novgorod is close to British 6th Batalion bonus and is close to several "high population" territories.

only Saratov looks as any disatvantage but here are close "high population" territories.

what is question for me - how will Moscow works? player from Muscovy could quickly gain Moscow and will have good strategic position. ofcourse there will be also many roads for attack him...

Industrial Helix wrote:If I brought back the old flag bonus system, my worst case scenario is that a player drops majority of the high pop zone and still managed to get nearby access to the flags, thus dropping the game.


I like the "new" flag bonus system more, but as I´m auto-deploy fan ;) (and map is a little buil on auto-deploy), what about give them +1 auto-deploy and bonus for holding all three +4 (random...)?

Industrial Helix wrote:Here's a radical option... make it a conquest map? Turn all those 2s and 3s into neutrals? I dunno how I feel about it though.


oh no, please. this could kill initiative...

Industrial Helix wrote:In my mind, using random deployment on most of the map essentially amounted to having smarter neutrals. Given the number of men on a commander, that would inevitably be the main thrust of the player's moves, even in 2 player games as he's got 4 commanders. So in the end, the 3s and 2s were inconsequential. They could be dangerous as a player had control over them. But in the end, the main threat was the commanders... does this make sense to you?


I think that each 2 player game could has this problem...

to Marshal, congrat to you blue coloured name :)
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class theBastard
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Medals: 5
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Fri Jul 23, 2010 9:50 am

Hmm... thanks for the input Bastard. I think you make a good point about each player having their own way to a quick bonus... though Ukraine might be a bit tough. Saratov, well, he's right next to a city and gets +1 auto deploy.
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby theBastard on Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:50 pm

Industrial Helix wrote:Hmm... thanks for the input Bastard. I think you make a good point about each player having their own way to a quick bonus... though Ukraine might be a bit tough. Saratov, well, he's right next to a city and gets +1 auto deploy.


not at all.

the same advantage (commander right next to city) has also Oran, Herson, Kuban but they have not border with so many "high population" territories as Saratov (but Tsaritsyn has not railroad).

only what is question how Muscovy will works, with only "high population" territories around and possibility to dirrect attack Moscow - the centre of railroads...
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class theBastard
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 9:05 am
Medals: 5
Standard Achievement (1) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Sun Jul 25, 2010 7:53 pm

Muscovy is going to be an interesting position to have. Personally, I think its the most difficult of positions as there is so much to do... like Germany in Axis and Allies. But at the same time, very powerful. In the end, is Muscovy the dominant player int he game... I don't think so but I think only Beta will tell.

Marshall... yes, you've got the gist of it. Though I want to elaborate on number 4: Yes, in my mind the 2s and 3s are more barriers... but at the same time they allow players to check a commander in a stronger position. For Stalin, the 3's are more important than for Trotsky who has his base right in Muscovy. The main idea behind this map is that for each player, there needs to be a different optimal strategy (unlike classic and its clones, where strategy is consistent but chances (troop drops) of following it vary).
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby MarshalNey on Mon Jul 26, 2010 1:03 am

OK, now that I understand where you're coming from, here's my two cents:

Considering player drops, even in a Commander-centric map like this one, as 'smarter neutrals' can possibly be a bit misleading for three reasons:
(1) The possibility of taking spoils in Flat Rate, Escalating and Nuclear games.
(2) The possibility of reducing an opponents' region count.
(3) The size of the troop reserve, particularly in Unlimited games

To elaborate, in spoils games, a 3-stack of troops is a godsend, while a 2-stack is trouble. Not every player does this (and more should), but a dispersed 1-1-1 deployment with an initial 3 troops, for instance, gives an additional chance with 4 vs. 3 over the more common all-3 deployment that gives a single 6 vs. 3. It may seem trivial, but taking (or not taking) a spoil, particularly in team games, can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

Even in No Spoils games, however, there's still the desire (usually in team games or 1v1s) to try to reduce an opponent's region count before she gets her turn. That often involves making multiple attacks with small deployments, much like those designed to take a spoil.

So starting with more 2-stacks than one's opponents has four negative results for a player/team:
(a) they will have a more difficult time later in the game taking spoils (obviously the Commander gives everyone a better than average chance of taking a spoil in the first turn) and also more difficulty "piling-on" an enemy.
(b) they will be more vulnerable to being attacked for a spoil/being 'piled-on' themselves
(c) they will have more limited options of where they can feasibly attack from to disrupt their enemies plans
(d) they will have fewer troops to reinforce to offensive stacks/places of vulnerability

Really, though I can sum this all up with the general statement:
The more troops you have, the more options you have and the harder you are to kill, and vice versa.

Yes, the Commanders are a key ingredient, but they are also balanced (more or less). So all other things being equal, it is the inequity in the drop of 2's vs. 3's that may give a player an edge from the first turn.

Your other question was (and quite pertinent), Is this edge significant? Well, considering that the disparity may be possibly (if unlikely) as high as 5 or 6 troops, and given the consequences outlined above... yes I do think that the edge given from a bad drop might be significant enough to overshadow/dramatically affect the operations of the Commanders.


In a conquest map, this does all become moot, but as TB said I think that would kill some of the fun of this map, and unnecessarily.

Giving some advantage to dropping a 2-stack could compensate, even if it was just a potential, long-term advantage. The Russian population was still largely agrarian in 1917, wasn't it? Didn't the communists conscript a ton of farmers, with disastrous consequences for the harvest? I think maybe there might be a way to justify giving some signifcance to the lower-density pop areas...

Or you could always make the 2-stacks mostly neutral, there are only 11 of them; reducing that number would reduce the potential disparity. I'm not keen on the idea, but it's certainly better than making this a conquest map.

Or an idea as radical as conquest perhaps... you could actually make all of the stacks 2-stacks. I like it because then it forces more focus on the Commanders, while making the drop equitable... Heck, you could even make a few places 3-stacks, if they held a particular location that needed it for game balance.... just a thought.
User avatar
Captain MarshalNey
 
Posts: 857
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:02 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO
Medals: 34
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1)
Manual Troops Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Teammate Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3)
Ratings Achievement (3) Tournament Achievement (3) Clan Achievement (4) General Contribution (5)

Re: Russian Revolution 6/23 p. 3

Postby Industrial Helix on Mon Jul 26, 2010 6:45 am

Well said and you make some good points. You idea of neutral twos is a good one and one option to consider. The other option to consider is to make the whole map 3s.... I'd rather do the latter because I dislike neutrals.
Sketchblog [Update 07/25/11]: http://indyhelixsketch.blogspot.com/
Living in Japan [Update 07/17/11]: http://mirrorcountryih.blogspot.com/
Russian Revolution map for ConquerClub [07/20/11]: viewtopic.php?f=241&t=116575
User avatar
Cook Industrial Helix
 
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:49 pm
Location: California
Medals: 36
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (3)
Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Speed Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Training Achievement (1) Map Contribution (5) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (3)

PreviousNext

Return to Recycling Box

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login